On
three days from April 30 through Friday, May 2, 2003,
FTC (Federal Trade Commission) held a "Spam Forum" in Washington, D.C. According to
FTC website,
purpose of this forum was "to address
proliferation of unsolicited commercial e-mail and to explore
technical, legal, and financial issues associated with it."
While
FTC and other government entities try to figure out how they can legally address
Spam issue, they are doing so without consulting with those of us who run small businesses online. Of
97 people who spoke at
forum,
majority was technicians and lawyers who represent
ISP's and Anti-Spam companies. A few of
people even represented large bulk email companies.
Forum participants could not even agree on a proper definition of "spam" --- yet they propose that they are
best qualified to help write
laws that will eliminate spam?
My question is this, who represented
small business owner and
small publishers at
FTC spam forum? No one really. It was not because
small business segment did not have representatives willing to speak on their behalf. In fact, both I-Cop.org and OMPUAC.org --- both of whom represent small online businesses --- had petitioned to have their representatives speak at
forum, but both were turned down.
You can read
list of
people who DID speak at
FTC "Spam Forum" at:
http://www.theezine.net/ftc_spam_forum.shtml
Should you honestly believe
anti-spam profiteers had your interests in mind when they had
opportunity to speak to
FTC?
Here are some of
anti-spam profiteers who found representation at
FTC "Spam Forum":
· Mail Abuse Prevention System (MAPS) · SpamCon Foundation · SpamCop · The Spamhaus Project · Habeas
Even in
hallowed lists of
anti-spam zealots,
profiteers aren't taken very seriously sometimes. When addressing Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., CEO of Habeas, Inc., a member of
SPAM-L list suggested:
"What makes you think that 'we' trust Habeas any more than any other organisation whose business model depends on spam continuing to exist in order to stay in business."
Good point.
William Waggoner, founder of AAW Marketing LLC in Las Vegas, Nevada, did actually support my own point of view. He suggested at
"Spam Forum" that technology techniques like spam filtering hurts even legitimate email marketers!
You know whom Mr. Waggoner was talking about. He was talking about those e-mail marketers who have actually acquired permission from
email recipient to send them commercial email.
When someone in
forum audience laughed at his comment, Waggoner fired back, "You think that's funny?"
So why did they laugh? This gets to
heart of why
FTC Spam Forum was bad news for
legitimate email marketer. Many anti-spam zealots do not believe that there is such a thing as "legitimate commercial email!"
TERM: Double Opt-in - Requires a subscriber to request a subscription and then to verify
intention to subscribe by following a defined procedure.